USADA files doping charges against Lance
Comments
-
Thanks for the support!mercsport wrote:Will just dip in here to post a link to a short, well written article by Jeff Pearlman on the CNN site upon how it's beginning to sink in about Armstrong in the US: http://tinyurl.com/8ypvshw
An aside: keep up the good work 'Biking Bernie'.
From that article:What Lance Armstrong is allegedly doing - what all athletes in his shoes seem to do - is beyond damaging. Across the world, millions of people believe in Armstrong's narrative. They love his wins, yes, but what drives them and inspires them is the way he faced cancer and battled back from a near-death experience. Young children in pediatric care have been relayed his story, have been told that one day, if you stay strong and fight and believe, you, too, can be just like Lance Armstrong.
It is good to see that I am not the only one who sees the relevance of what is the central theme of 'The Armstrong myth'. The way he cynically exploited his image as 'The man who beat cancer', and fed other cancer sufferers false hope based on a doping-fuelled lie is the most unsavoury aspect of this whole episode.0 -
Any theories ? If this trail goes all the way back to '96 I would have thought he would be in the thick of this.iainf72 wrote:Was having a read of the Asylum this afternoon, and it was the usual dross, aside from someone who wondered why Chris Carmichael wasn't on the list....0 -
le patron wrote:
Any theories ? If this trail goes all the way back to '96 I would have thought he would be in the thick of this.iainf72 wrote:Was having a read of the Asylum this afternoon, and it was the usual dross, aside from someone who wondered why Chris Carmichael wasn't on the list....
He's one of the people who spoke to the USADA?Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
mfin wrote:DeadCalm wrote:
Some of what you say may be interesting and relevant. Unfortunately. the way you express yourself for the most part means that the vast majority of us switch off as soon we see your avatar.BikingBernie wrote:
Your loss, not mine. :roll:No tA Doctor wrote:
Not interested.BikingBernie wrote:...
Believe me (you might not), but the delivery aside, there are some supported facts in what BB says. It can sound relentless, but attitude vs cancer for instance is studied at length. Now, whatever the conclusions of any studies, they might not be entirely relevant to the thread title or original topic of the thread as inferred by title, but they are, nevertheless interesting... and where some of his posts get looked at as blind cynicism, is that as daft as blind faith in other cyclists??? blind faith some people display time and time again with their blinkered idolisation of their chosen heroes (that can often extend to their opinions going as far as to 'go on about' how they dress/conduct themselves etc, as if we're supposed to agree that these individuals are ones that we should also like/admire???... :roll: )
If anyone chooses to not find the posts interesting, then why let it bother them?
The cool thing about forums like this is that we all have our say, maybe BB has more than his say?? but if that's down to how much he says, then everyone else has the same opportunity.
Spend time typing rather than moaning/typing and balance the argument out?? (not aimed at you, just quoted you to post)
Threads such as this would be more boring without BB's input. Unless we want threads that has every other statement saying '+1' or the the witless 'I blame it on wiggle'.
Oh.. and PS.. BB, im not defending you or your apparent stances, but I don't find it important to pre-emtively prejudice myself to your posts before I read them (...which often I don't
) ... type (or cut'n'paste) on...
+1
(I haven't actually read what you've said, but anyone with a nice avatar and who can bother to post a reply as lengthy as yours will get my vote any day of the week.) 0 -
iainf72 wrote:le patron wrote:
Any theories ? If this trail goes all the way back to '96 I would have thought he would be in the thick of this.iainf72 wrote:Was having a read of the Asylum this afternoon, and it was the usual dross, aside from someone who wondered why Chris Carmichael wasn't on the list....
He's one of the people who spoke to the USADA?
My guess is that the lawyers at USADA have cut him some slack coz in their very limited spare time they're all 'Time Crunched Cyclists'.0 -
iainf72 wrote:le patron wrote:
Any theories ? If this trail goes all the way back to '96 I would have thought he would be in the thick of this.iainf72 wrote:Was having a read of the Asylum this afternoon, and it was the usual dross, aside from someone who wondered why Chris Carmichael wasn't on the list....
He's one of the people who spoke to the USADA?
Please, please let this possibility turn out to be true!0 -
BikingBernie wrote:
Thanks for the support!mercsport wrote:Will just dip in here to post a link to a short, well written article by Jeff Pearlman on the CNN site upon how it's beginning to sink in about Armstrong in the US: http://tinyurl.com/8ypvshw
An aside: keep up the good work 'Biking Bernie'.
From that article:What Lance Armstrong is allegedly doing - what all athletes in his shoes seem to do - is beyond damaging. Across the world, millions of people believe in Armstrong's narrative. They love his wins, yes, but what drives them and inspires them is the way he faced cancer and battled back from a near-death experience. Young children in pediatric care have been relayed his story, have been told that one day, if you stay strong and fight and believe, you, too, can be just like Lance Armstrong.
It is good to see that I am not the only one who sees the relevance of what is the central theme of 'The Armstrong myth'. The way he cynically exploited his image as 'The man who beat cancer', and fed other cancer sufferers false hope based on a doping-fuelled lie is the most unsavoury aspect of this whole episode.
I like your new avatar picture 0 -
symo wrote:cycling5280 wrote:iainf72 wrote:
Mmididoctors wrote:coriordan wrote:mididoctors wrote:
So it has all (kinda) happened before. Whats the difference now?
Why didn't the officials take any notice before?
well thats a good question
Which part?
The feds were investigating, the USADA was investigating at the same time. The feds case was ended but the USADA continued their investigation. The feds case was about fraud, the USADA is about doping.
Not much of a mystery.
The Feds had to investigate doping to some extent if they were going to prove fraud. How does it work otherwise? What was the fraud about if it was tied to doping?
So it appears the FEDS dropped the charges on fraud (or Fabiani forced them to) however it looks like during their investigation they have uncovered evidence that doping products and equipment were sourced by those named.
These products may be legal to buy in the non cyclist world but owning or buying them in the cycling world only means one thing. So they have testimony and perhaps the paper trail thanks to the FEDS.
*have read the whole thread and woo, positive thinking, nazis and a unicorn. Passes the popcorn.
The FEDs didn't drop the charges or clear anyone know. The investigation was CLOSED while it was still being worked on by someone higher up. Therefore no one was cleared of charges as they never got a chance to be filed.
LA and JB etc like to say they were cleared when that isn't the truth0 -
iainf72 wrote:le patron wrote:
Any theories ? If this trail goes all the way back to '96 I would have thought he would be in the thick of this.iainf72 wrote:Was having a read of the Asylum this afternoon, and it was the usual dross, aside from someone who wondered why Chris Carmichael wasn't on the list....
He's one of the people who spoke to the USADA?
Makes sense. Given they are targeting the back-room here, not interviewing Carmichael would be a bit of a miss by Travis Tygart, and everyone they spoke to complied apart from Lance.
Although I didn't have him anywhere near the top of my squealer list.0 -
Looks like JV doesn't think much of the current LA camp tactics
http://twitter.com/Vaughters/status/213937918677499905Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
mfin wrote:iainf72 wrote:le patron wrote:
Any theories ? If this trail goes all the way back to '96 I would have thought he would be in the thick of this.iainf72 wrote:Was having a read of the Asylum this afternoon, and it was the usual dross, aside from someone who wondered why Chris Carmichael wasn't on the list....
He's one of the people who spoke to the USADA?
Please, please let this possibility turn out to be true!
Carmichael testifying could be the smoking gun to beat all smoking guns. His testimony could not be dismissed as that of a spurned ex team mate or or employee. Carmichael Coaching must have made millions on the back the the association with Armstrong' and I thought they still maintained a relationship. I sincerely hope this happens.0 -
Beatmaker wrote:Carmichael testifying could be the smoking gun to beat all smoking guns. His testimony could not be dismissed as that of a spurned ex team mate or or employee. Carmichael Coaching must have made millions on the back the the association with Armstrong' and I thought they still maintained a relationship. I sincerely hope this happens.
Yes it would, but unless Carmichael had either an official capacity at USPostal (I don't know, anyone got an answer?) or unofficial capacity but contact with lots of riders (linked with Hincapie as well, but others?) then he probably won't be in focus - at least this time around.
I'm hoping that USADA are employing a "slice the salami" tactic though. There are plenty of potential spin-off cases that could follow...Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
iainf72 wrote:Looks like JV doesn't think much of the current LA camp tactics
http://twitter.com/Vaughters/status/213937918677499905
Is this link broken for anyone else?You live and learn. At any rate, you live0 -
Yep, me too. I guess Iain is referring to the following:Jez mon wrote:iainf72 wrote:Looks like JV doesn't think much of the current LA camp tactics
http://twitter.com/Vaughters/status/213937918677499905
Is this link broken for anyone else?
Jonathan Vaughters @Vaughters
@SSbike One only needs to recall incident w Tyler Hamilton in Aspen to reconcile USADA's choice to avoid potential witness tampering.0 -
DeadCalm wrote:
Yep, me too. I guess Iain is referring to the following:Jez mon wrote:iainf72 wrote:Looks like JV doesn't think much of the current LA camp tactics
http://twitter.com/Vaughters/status/213937918677499905
Is this link broken for anyone else?
Jonathan Vaughters @Vaughters
@SSbike One only needs to recall incident w Tyler Hamilton in Aspen to reconcile USADA's choice to avoid potential witness tampering.
Yep Armstrong wants everyone to "play by the rules" Oh the irony!
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/armstrong-frustrated-by-lack-of-information-from-usada0 -
Given that Armstrong must have a good idea of who testified, what's to stop him from pressurising anyone he the thinks might have said something? Perhaps he could even avoid a witness tampering charge by saying, as the names had been kept secret, he wasn't aware the person he had 'discussions' with was a witness.0
-
Not sure he has many threats left to make0
-
BikingBernie wrote:Given that Armstrong must have a good idea of who testified, what's to stop him from pressurising anyone he the thinks might have said something? Perhaps he could even avoid a witness tampering charge by saying, as the names had been kept secret, he wasn't aware the person he had 'discussions' with was a witness.
TBH it's probably more about slinging some dirt and undermining their testimony than actually intimidating them. Difficult to start public name-calling unless he can say "but he started it". So get the names, leak them, then play to the gallery.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
Armstrong paid nearly half a million dollars to Ferrari?
Sorry, it's in foreign:
http://www.as.com/ciclismo/articulo/arm ... icic_1/Tes
Google translate says:| 16/06/2012
The investigations carried out since 2010 Padua prosecutor Benedetto Roberti, on the Italian Michele Ferrari, Lance Armstrong's doctor and also accused by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, may reveal more evidence against the American cyclist who in 2006 made a payment of $ 465,000 Ferrari, according to La Gazzetta dello Sport published.
The prosecution of Padua has undergone a painstaking siege to Ferrari, with wiretaps, email and numbered accounts. Around ninety cyclists are involved in the investigation of this plot that would have moved about 30 million euros.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
What I'm slightly surprised by - and probably shouldn't be - was the wilful ignorance that tailed the breaking news; how dredging up the US Fed case was inappropriate, how he'd never failed a test, and many more untruths and irrelevant points that only serve deflect attention from anything of substance. Then again, why would you be surprised when you get statements like Bruyneel's that are engineered to accentuate that ignorance.0
-
Nike, Trek, Oakley are still backing him:"Lance has proven that his marketability is Teflon-coated," says Paul Swangard, managing director at the Warsaw Sports Marketing Center at the University of Oregon. "Most of his fans will look at this news with a degree of indifference, and sponsors shouldn't be too worried."
..."Our relationship with Lance remains as strong as ever," Nike said in a statement. "As always we believe in Lance," said an Oakley statement.
...marketers recognize that many consumers decided a long time ago that they "believe Lance," says David Carter, executive director of the University of Southern California Sports business Institute.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/ ... 55600182/1
Many of the comments show that last statement is not far from the truth.0 -
BikingBernie wrote:Nike, Trek, Oakley are still backing him:"Lance has proven that his marketability is Teflon-coated," says Paul Swangard, managing director at the Warsaw Sports Marketing Center at the University of Oregon. "Most of his fans will look at this news with a degree of indifference, and sponsors shouldn't be too worried."
..."Our relationship with Lance remains as strong as ever," Nike said in a statement. "As always we believe in Lance," said an Oakley statement.
...marketers recognize that many consumers decided a long time ago that they "believe Lance," says David Carter, executive director of the University of Southern California Sports business Institute.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/ ... 55600182/1
Many of the comments show that last statement is not far from the truth.
Never sure how many of the comments are just his astroturfing boys out in force.
Nike and Oakley pretty much have to say what they do, I think. They can't alienate the believers, yet. Like everyone else with a vested interest they'll sit on the fence until it's time to jump. That's most cyclists as well.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
BikingBernie wrote:
You mean the sort of 'peer reviewed, evidence based practice' that all those stories refer to, and which were published in the Journal Cancer, the Lancet and the British Medical Journal? Those studies are also up to a decade more recent than the one you refer to. That study you cite doesn't even support the conclusion you wish to draw from it, with the abstract specifically making reference only to the value of 'social support systems and an element of spirituality and religion rather than having a 'will to survive' or 'fighting spirit'. It also relates these factors to measures of 'quality of life' rather than just survival rates. Without having access to the full paper it is hard to know just what sort of paper it is (a review? original research?) Nor what its detailed findings actually were.Full Merckx wrote:Peer reviewed, evidence based practice has always been my preferred source of info rather than PISH from the BBC
The general consensus, as supported by more recent scientific studies, is that having a 'positive attitude' has no effect on cancer survival rates. Here's one relatively recent peer reviewed paper on the topic. The full text is available.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 0/abstractEmotional well-being does not predict survival in head and neck cancer patients†
A radiation therapy oncology group study
James C. Coyne PhD1,‡,*,
Thomas F. Pajak PhD2,
Jonathan Harris MS2,
Andre Konski MD3,
Benjamin Movsas MD3,
Kian Ang MD4,
Deborah Watkins Bruner PhD5
Article first published online: 22 OCT 2007
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.23080
The current results add to the weight of the evidence that emotional functioning is not an independent predictor of survival in cancer patients.
...Studies that are interpreted as indicating that better psychologic functioning predicts longer survival among cancer patients8–11 can be countered with other instances in which better psychologic functioning appears to predict shorter survival12–15 and with the larger number of studies that had null results.16–27 This literature is plagued by studies with samples that are heterogeneous with respect to staging and cancer site, unmeasured or poorly measured confounding biologic and treatment variables, and small numbers of deaths to adequately accommodate possible variability in patient and treatment characteristics. The ready rival explanation of some apparent demonstrations that emotional well-being predicts survival is that patients' self-reported emotional states reflect overall disease burden and symptom distress or their awareness of their medical condition and prognosis.
The belief that emotional well-being affects survival, nonetheless, has been remarkably resilient in the face of contrary data.
Some comment via the APA on that paper:
http://www.apa.org/monitor/jan08/cancer.aspxIn the large-scale study conducted over nine years, Coyne and colleagues used baseline quality-of-life questionnaires to assess the well-being of 1,093 cancer patients. All participants were involved in clinical trials, which ensured uniformity of treatment and ruled out substantial health disparities in the sample. During the study, 646 patients died, and the research team found no relationship between their emotional well-being and cancer progression and death.
Though his findings strongly contradict the notion that a positive attitude is related to survival, the idea of "fighting" cancer is deeply rooted in our culture, says Coyne.
"It's the American way, that you can do it, you can fight it," he adds.
Based on the study results, Coyne believes it's important to not blame cancer patients who don't adopt an aggressively positive spirit.
Lady in town here went to that place in France in the Pyrenees I believe and got better. Something to do with the water. So, I think attitude helps some.0 -
Correlation versus causation? Peer reviewed study?cajun_cyclist wrote:Lady in town here went to that place in France in the Pyrenees I believe and got better. Something to do with the water. So, I think attitude helps some.
Whoops, nearly fell for your trolling.
If people who visited places like Lourdes inexplicably grew new legs or some such, I might be more impressed.
0 -
Biking Bernie, you are the biggest troll, yeah, USA does not need Atheists high suicide rate and more people dead in one century in the name of Atheism (Communism) than from all religious wars, that's all you mainland European Atheists bring to the table besides bankruptcy. You can only make trolling idiotic statements and have some sort of anti-lance man crush. You have no idea what you speak about but only take all this from David Walsh's books and bring nothing new to the table.0
-
BikingBernie: Big Deal, You are an anti-American Bigot, Who gives two squats what your idiotic stupid rage says. Big Flippin' Deal!0
-
cajun_cyclist wrote:Biking Bernie, you are the biggest troll, yeah, USA does not need Atheists high suicide rate and more people dead in one century in the name of Atheism (Communism) than from all religious wars, that's all you mainland European Atheists bring to the table besides bankruptcy. You can only make trolling idiotic statements and have some sort of anti-lance man crush. You have no idea what you speak about but only take all this from David Walsh's books and bring nothing new to the table.
Dude saying atheism = communism makes you sound like a weapons grade moron.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
No tA Doctor wrote:Armstrong paid nearly half a million dollars to Ferrari?
Sorry, it's in foreign:
http://www.as.com/ciclismo/articulo/arm ... icic_1/Tes
Google translate says:| 16/06/2012
The investigations carried out since 2010 Padua prosecutor Benedetto Roberti, on the Italian Michele Ferrari, Lance Armstrong's doctor and also accused by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, may reveal more evidence against the American cyclist who in 2006 made a payment of $ 465,000 Ferrari, according to La Gazzetta dello Sport published.
The prosecution of Padua has undergone a painstaking siege to Ferrari, with wiretaps, email and numbered accounts. Around ninety cyclists are involved in the investigation of this plot that would have moved about 30 million euros.
Interesting - more details here: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/12134 ... -2006.aspx
Are there restrictions on what evidence USADA can use from on-going criminal investigations? Would they be able to use the USD 465,000 payment? And wiretaps?
Really, really pleased that Armstrong et al have been charged - surprised just how good a mood it has put me in. Brilliant news.
Contrasting that with the reaction of my friends who only have a passing interest in cycling is quite interesting. They're pretty sad about it all. They knew there were suspicions, but had somehow clung on to the hope that this man's "insiprational story" was true. Just goes to show how important it is that Armstrong goes down.0 -
iainf72 wrote:
Dude saying atheism = communism makes you sound like a weapons grade moron.
Morons of mass destruction....Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
iainf72 wrote:cajun_cyclist wrote:Biking Bernie, you are the biggest troll, yeah, USA does not need Atheists high suicide rate and more people dead in one century in the name of Atheism (Communism) than from all religious wars, that's all you mainland European Atheists bring to the table besides bankruptcy. You can only make trolling idiotic statements and have some sort of anti-lance man crush. You have no idea what you speak about but only take all this from David Walsh's books and bring nothing new to the table.
Dude saying atheism = communism makes you sound like a weapons grade moron.
Glad you admit it Ian and what place attacking religion or one's religious beliefs has to do with a cycling forum is beyond me but glad that now we see your's and bikingbernie's intolerance. Love the way you jumped to the defence of atheism. Enjoy Londonistan.
Really, I doubt if bikingbernie has ever visited the US, with his weird stuff of printing nazi memorabilia here and calling others trolls. Unbelievable, oh yeah, it had to do with the "Will of " whatever....0
